| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
 BDS Movement:  Power of the People at Work Against Apartheid 
	Israeli Regime  By Ramzy Baroud Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, February 20, 2012 
 The issue is not about hummus, chocolate bars or Dead Sea 
	vacations. It is about civil society taking full responsibility for its own 
	action (or lack there of). The issue is not exactly about Israeli products 
	either, but rather about how even a seemingly innocent decision like buying 
	Israeli dates may enable the continued subjugation of the Palestinian 
	people.
 
 Because the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions 
	movement (BDS) highlights this, the reaction it often generates is charged 
	and vehement. Many also react to the BDS because it actually works. Israeli 
	supporters have every right to be concerned that their carefully customized 
	discourse on Israel’s infallibility (juxtaposed with Palestinian depravity) 
	- which has been promoted for decades in various media and political outlets 
	in the US and Western countries - is now simply falling apart.
 
 The recent University of Pennsylvania BDS conference, organized by student 
	group, PennBDS, was the latest example to illustrate both the effectiveness 
	of the global movement and also of the real worry felt by supporters of 
	Israel in the United States. Knowing fully that facing BDS allegations head 
	on would most likely be unsuccessful, they organized around misinformation, 
	name-calling and intimidation. However, the tired strategy is no longer 
	bearing fruit.
 
 Israel’s Zionist supporters made every attempt to 
	galvanize the Jewish community in Philadelphia into targeting the conference 
	that called for Israel to be held accountable for its military occupation, 
	racial discrimination and flagrant violations of international law.
 
 One of those angered by the conference is Ruben Gur, a professor of 
	psychiatry at the university. In an article published in the Daily 
	Pennsylvanian, he likened the conference organizers to ‘Nazis’. “A relevant 
	precedent for such a movement is the groups organized by the Nazis in the 
	1930s to boycott, divest and sanction Jews and their businesses,” he wrote, 
	perhaps knowing fully the historical inaccuracy of his statement.
 
 Penn President Amy Gutmann and Trustees Chair David L. Cohen insisted that 
	allowing PennBDS to organize was merely a moral duty aimed at “protecting 
	speech we may not like” (a strangely balanced statement, to say the least). 
	“The University has repeatedly, consistently and forcefully expressed our 
	adamant opposition to this agenda. Simply stated, we fundamentally disagree 
	with the position taken by PennBDS,” they wrote in the Daily Pennsylvanian.
 
 The debate registered in every available medium and extended far beyond 
	the parameters of the university itself. Bizarrely, the Jewish Federation of 
	Greater Philadelphia wished to counter the BDS conference by hosting no 
	other than Alan Dershowitz to deliver an emergency speech on campus. 
	Dershowitz, known for his inflammatory rhetoric and smearing approach to 
	pro-Palestinian activists, was forced to change tactics, as the conference 
	and the controversy it generated allowed BDS activists a platform to 
	organize and convey a clear and peaceful message. “The BDS conference gives 
	us an opportunity to respond to hate with positive messages,” Dershowitz 
	said, as reported in Philadelphia’s Jewish Exponent newspaper.
 
 Those involved in promoting causes of peace and justice know well that such 
	hysteria is an indication of fear and palpable weakness. The pro-Israeli 
	logic – justifying racial superiority, rationalizing military occupation, 
	defending ethnic cleansing – is simply worthless in the face of an 
	articulate opposing message. Therefore, whenever confronted by such events, 
	Israeli-sympathizers resort to igniting ‘controversy’. This is fed mostly by 
	biased reporting, inflammatory language and unfounded accusations. Professor 
	Gur was unmatched in representing the model, as he attacked even the student 
	newspaper itself: “I could barely believe my eyes. It is bad enough that 
	Penn has allowed itself to be associated with this hateful genocidal 
	organization, but for you to give room for their ‘explanation’ and then 
	dignify this outpouring of misinformation and anti-Semitism…”
 
 Still, “while the opponents of BDS were busy name-calling, the people at the 
	conference were engaged in pointing out the facts on the ground,” according 
	to Uri Hores, an Israeli peace activist (writing in +972 magazine). These 
	include: “practical facts, historical facts and legal facts, presented by 
	experts in international human rights law like Noura Erakat, who provided 
	the conference with a comprehensive overview of the complex legal system 
	under which Palestinians live.”
 
 According to Hores, the Penn 
	conference was “modeled after a similar conference held in 2009 at Hampshire 
	College in Amherst, Massachusetts.” This is very important since the success 
	of these initiatives, despite the defamations and exaggerated controversy, 
	invite discussions elsewhere. One such precedent was in April 2010, when the 
	student senate at the University of California, Berkeley debated the issue 
	of divestment from US companies that were “materially or militarily 
	profiting” from the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. A 
	divestment bill was put to a vote. Notable individuals including Noam 
	Chomsky, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Naomi Klein and Alice Walker issued 
	statements in support of the bill, while Nobel laureates Shirin Ebadi, 
	Mairead Maguire, Rigoberta Menchu Tum and Jody Williams signed a letter 
	echoing the outpouring of support: “We stand united in our belief that 
	divesting from companies that provide significant support for the Israeli 
	military provides moral and strategic stewardship of tuition and 
	taxpayer-funded public education money. We are all peace makers, and we 
	believe that no amount of dialogue without economic pressure can motivate 
	Israel to change its policy of using overwhelming force against Palestinian 
	civilians.”
 
 It should be noted that the outpouring of support for 
	BDS initiatives was hardly done at the behest of any individual or group. 
	Rather it was a response to a call made by 171 Palestinian civil society 
	organizations in July 2005.
 
 The Middle East region is already 
	testimony to the rise of people power which has inspired the world. BDS is a 
	mere continuation of a global struggle for justice, and PennBDS are but mere 
	facilitators of an expanding movement that will surely usher real change in 
	a long-stagnant colonial paradigm. Prominent Palestinian activist Ali 
	Abunimah told the conference in his keynote speech: “This insane hysteria 
	about the conference tells us something about the moment we are in. In terms 
	of the battle of ideas, we are in the end game.”
 
 A growing number of 
	people are already realizing this fact. One of the US’s most celebrated rock 
	musicians, Cat Power, cancelled her Israel show, “joining a list of artists 
	shunning the country,” according to the Washington Post (Feb 10). She 
	canceled a scheduled Tel Aviv concert because she felt “sick in her spirit”. 
	Numerous artists, companies and ordinary individuals also feel that way, 
	proving that global solidarity is not a sentimental value, but real podium 
	for those who wish to bring about positive change.
 
 - Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) 
	is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of 
	PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: 
	Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press, London).
     |  |  |